Decision Analysis

Learning Objectives
After completing this chapter, students will be able to:

1. List the steps of the decision-making

process.
2. Describe the types of decision-making
environments.
3. Make decisions under uncertainty.
4. Use probability values to make decisions
under risk.
 Learning Objectives
After completing this chapter, students will be able to:

5. Develop accurate and useful decision

trees.
6. Revise probabilities using Bayesian
analysis.
7. Use computers to solve basic decision-
making problems.
8. Understand the importance and use of
utility theory in decision making.
 Chapter Outline
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The Six Steps in Decision Making
3.3 Types of Decision-Making
Environments
3.4 Decision Making under Uncertainty
3.5 Decision Making under Risk
3.6 Decision Trees
3.7 How Probability Values Are
Estimated by Bayesian Analysis
3.8 Utility Theory
 Introduction

 What is involved in making a good

decision?
 Decision theory is an analytic and
systematic approach to the study of
decision making.
 A good decision is one that is based
on logic, considers all available data
and possible alternatives, and the
quantitative approach described here.
The Six Steps in Decision Making

1. Clearly define the problem at hand.

2. List the possible alternatives.
3. Identify the possible outcomes or states
of nature.
4. List the payoff (typically profit) of each
combination of alternatives and
outcomes.
5. Select one of the mathematical decision
theory models.
6. Apply the model and make your decision.
Thompson Lumber Company

Step 1 – Define the problem.

 The company is considering
expanding by manufacturing and
marketing a new product – backyard
storage sheds.
Step 2 – List alternatives.
 Construct a large new plant.
 Construct a small new plant.
 Do not develop the new product line
at all.
Step 3 – Identify possible outcomes.
 The market could be favorable or
unfavorable.
Thompson Lumber Company

Step 4 – List the payoffs.

 Identify conditional values for the
profits for large plant, small plant, and
no development for the two possible
market conditions.
Step 5 – Select the decision model.
 This depends on the environment and
amount of risk and uncertainty.
Step 6 – Apply the model to the data.
 Solution and analysis are then used to
aid in decision-making.
 Thompson Lumber Company

Decision Table with Conditional Values for

Thompson Lumber

STATE OF NATURE

FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($)
Construct a large plant 200,000 –180,000

Construct a small plant 100,000 –20,000

Do nothing 0 0

Table 3.1
 Types of Decision-Making
Environments

Type 1: Decision making under certainty

 The decision maker knows with
certainty the consequences of every
alternative or decision choice.
Type 2: Decision making under uncertainty
 The decision maker does not know the
probabilities of the various outcomes.
Type 3: Decision making under risk
 The decision maker knows the
probabilities of the various outcomes.
 Decision Making Under
Uncertainty
There are several criteria for making decisions
under uncertainty:
1. Maximax (optimistic)
2. Maximin (pessimistic)
3. Criterion of realism (Hurwicz)
4. Equally likely (Laplace)
5. Minimax regret
 Maximax
Used to find the alternative that maximizes the
maximum payoff.
 Locate the maximum payoff for each alternative.
 Select the alternative with the maximum number.

STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE MAXIMUM IN
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) A ROW ($)
Construct a large
200,000 –180,000 200,000
plant
Maximax
Construct a small
100,000 –20,000 100,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
Table 3.2
 Maximin
Used to find the alternative that maximizes
the minimum payoff.
 Locate the minimum payoff for each alternative.
 Select the alternative with the maximum
number.
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE MINIMUM IN
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) A ROW ($)
Construct a large
200,000 –180,000 –180,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 –20,000 –20,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
Table 3.3 Maximin
 Criterion of Realism (Hurwicz)
This is a weighted average compromise
between optimism and pessimism.
 Select a coefficient of realism , with 0≤α≤1.
 A value of 1 is perfectly optimistic, while a
value of 0 is perfectly pessimistic.
 Compute the weighted averages for each
alternative.
 Select the alternative with the highest value.

Weighted average = (maximum in row)

+ (1 – )(minimum in row)
 Criterion of Realism (Hurwicz)
 For the large plant alternative using  = 0.8:
(0.8)(200,000) + (1 – 0.8)(–180,000) = 124,000
 For the small plant alternative using  = 0.8:
(0.8)(100,000) + (1 – 0.8)(–20,000) = 76,000
STATE OF NATURE
CRITERION
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE OF REALISM
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) ( = 0.8) $
Construct a large
200,000 –180,000 124,000
plant
Realism
Construct a small
100,000 –20,000 76,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
Table 3.4
 Equally Likely (Laplace)
Considers all the payoffs for each alternative
 Find the average payoff for each alternative.
 Select the alternative with the highest average.

STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE ROW
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) AVERAGE ($)
Construct a large
200,000 –180,000 10,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 –20,000 40,000
plant
Equally likely
Do nothing 0 0 0

Table 3.5
 Minimax Regret
Based on opportunity loss or regret, this is
the difference between the optimal profit and
actual payoff for a decision.
 Create an opportunity loss table by determining
the opportunity loss from not choosing the best
alternative.
 Opportunity loss is calculated by subtracting
each payoff in the column from the best payoff
in the column.
 Find the maximum opportunity loss for each
alternative and pick the alternative with the
minimum number.
 Minimax Regret
Determining Opportunity Losses for Thompson Lumber
STATE OF NATURE

FAVORABLE MARKET ($) UNFAVORABLE MARKET ($)

200,000 – 200,000 0 – (–180,000)

200,000 – 100,000 0 – (–20,000)

200,000 – 0 0–0

Table 3.6
 Minimax Regret
Opportunity Loss Table for Thompson Lumber

STATE OF NATURE

FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($)
Construct a large plant 0 180,000

Construct a small plant 100,000 20,000

Do nothing 200,000 0

Table 3.7
 Minimax Regret

Thompson’s Minimax Decision Using Opportunity Loss

STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE MAXIMUM IN
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) A ROW ($)
Construct a large
0 180,000 180,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 20,000 100,000
plant
Minimax
Do nothing 200,000 0 200,000

Table 3.8
 Decision Making Under Risk
 This is decision making when there are several
possible states of nature, and the probabilities
associated with each possible state are known.
 The most popular method is to choose the
alternative with the highest expected monetary
value (EMV).
 This is very similar to the expected value calculated in
the last chapter.

EMV (alternative i) = (payoff of first state of nature)

x (probability of first state of nature)
+ (payoff of second state of nature)
x (probability of second state of nature)
+ … + (payoff of last state of nature)
x (probability of last state of nature)
 EMV for Thompson Lumber
 Suppose each market outcome has a probability of
occurrence of 0.50.
 Which alternative would give the highest EMV?
 The calculations are:

EMV (large plant) = ($200,000)(0.5) + (–$180,000)(0.5)

= $10,000
EMV (small plant) = ($100,000)(0.5) + (–$20,000)(0.5)
= $40,000
EMV (do nothing) = ($0)(0.5) + ($0)(0.5)
= $0
 EMV for Thompson Lumber

STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) EMV ($)
Construct a large
200,000 –180,000 10,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 –20,000 40,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
Probabilities 0.50 0.50

Table 3.9 Largest EMV

 Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)
 EVPI places an upper bound on what you should
pay for additional information.
EVPI = EVwPI – Maximum EMV

 EVwPI is the long run average return if we have

perfect information before a decision is made.

EVwPI = (best payoff for first state of nature)

x (probability of first state of nature)
+ (best payoff for second state of nature)
x (probability of second state of nature)
+ … + (best payoff for last state of nature)
x (probability of last state of nature)
 Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)

 Suppose Scientific Marketing, Inc. offers

analysis that will provide certainty about
market conditions (favorable).
 Additional information will cost $65,000.
 Should Thompson Lumber purchase the
information?
 Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)
Decision Table with Perfect Information

STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) EMV ($)
Construct a large
200,000 -180,000 10,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 -20,000 40,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
With perfect
200,000 0 100,000
information
EVwPI
Probabilities 0.5 0.5
Table 3.10
 Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)
The maximum EMV without additional information is
$40,000.
EVPI = EVwPI – Maximum EMV
= $100,000 - $40,000
= $60,000

So the maximum Thompson

should pay for the additional
information is $60,000.
 Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)
The maximum EMV without additional information is
$40,000.
EVPI = EVwPI – Maximum EMV
= $100,000 - $40,000
= $60,000

So the maximum Thompson

should pay for the additional
information is $60,000.
Therefore, Thompson should not
pay $65,000 for this information.
 Expected Opportunity Loss

 Expected opportunity loss (EOL) is the

cost of not picking the best solution.
 First construct an opportunity loss table.
 For each alternative, multiply the
opportunity loss by the probability of that
loss for each possible outcome and add
these together.
 Minimum EOL will always result in the
same decision as maximum EMV.
 Minimum EOL will always equal EVPI.
 Expected Opportunity Loss
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) EOL
Construct a large plant 0 180,000 90,000
Construct a small
100,000 20,000 60,000
plant
Do nothing 200,000 0 100,000
Probabilities 0.50 0.50
Table 3.11 Minimum EOL
EOL (large plant) = (0.50)($0) + (0.50)($180,000)
= $90,000
EOL (small plant) = (0.50)($100,000) + (0.50)($20,000)
= $60,000
EOL (do nothing) = (0.50)($200,000) + (0.50)($0)
= $100,000
 Sensitivity Analysis
 Sensitivity analysis examines how the decision
might change with different input data.
 For the Thompson Lumber example:

P = probability of a favorable market

(1 – P) = probability of an unfavorable market
 Sensitivity Analysis
EMV(Large Plant) = $200,000P – $180,000)(1 – P)
= $200,000P – $180,000 + $180,000P
= $380,000P – $180,000
EMV(Small Plant) = $100,000P – $20,000)(1 – P)
= $100,000P – $20,000 + $20,000P
= $120,000P – $20,000
EMV(Do Nothing) = $0P + 0(1 – P)
= $0
 Sensitivity Analysis
EMV Values

$300,000

$200,000 EMV (large plant)

Point 2

$100,000 EMV (small plant)

Point 1

0 EMV (do nothing)

.167 .615 1
–$100,000 Values of P

–$200,000

Figure 3.1
 Sensitivity Analysis
Point 1:
EMV(do nothing) = EMV(small plant)
20,000
0  $120,000 P  $20,000 P  0.167
120 ,000

Point 2:
EMV(small plant) = EMV(large plant)
$120,000 P  $20,000  $380,000 P  $180,000
160 ,000
P  0.615
260 ,000
 Sensitivity Analysis
BEST RANGE OF P
ALTERNATIVE VALUES
Do nothing Less than 0.167
EMV Values Construct a small plant 0.167 – 0.615
$300,000 Construct a large plant Greater than 0.615

$200,000 EMV (large plant)

Point 2

$100,000 EMV (small plant)

Point 1

0 EMV (do nothing)

.167 .615 1
–$100,000 Values of P

–$200,000
Figure 3.1
 Using Excel
Input Data for the Thompson Lumber Problem
Using Excel QM

Program 3.1A
 Using Excel

Output Results for the Thompson Lumber Problem

Using Excel QM

Program 3.1B
 Decision Trees
 Any problem that can be presented in a
decision table can also be graphically
represented in a decision tree.
 Decision trees are most beneficial when a
sequence of decisions must be made.
 All decision trees contain decision points
or nodes, from which one of several alternatives
may be chosen.
 All decision trees contain state-of-nature
points or nodes, out of which one state of
nature will occur.
 Five Steps of
Decision Tree Analysis

1. Define the problem.

2. Structure or draw the decision tree.
3. Assign probabilities to the states of
nature.
4. Estimate payoffs for each possible
combination of alternatives and states of
nature.
5. Solve the problem by computing
expected monetary values (EMVs) for
each state of nature node.
 Structure of Decision Trees
 Trees start from left to right.
 Trees represent decisions and outcomes
in sequential order.
 Squares represent decision nodes.
 Circles represent states of nature nodes.
 Lines or branches connect the decisions
nodes and the states of nature.
 Thompson’s Decision Tree
A State-of-Nature Node

Favorable Market
A Decision Node
1
Unfavorable Market

Favorable Market
Construct
Small Plant
2
Unfavorable Market

Figure 3.2
 Thompson’s Decision Tree
EMV for Node = (0.5)($200,000) + (0.5)(–$180,000)
1 = $10,000
Payoffs
Favorable Market (0.5)
$200,000
Alternative with best
EMV is selected 1
Unfavorable Market (0.5)
–$180,000

Favorable Market (0.5)

$100,000
Construct
Small Plant
2
Unfavorable Market (0.5)
–$20,000

EMV for Node = (0.5)($100,000)

2 = $40,000 + (0.5)(–$20,000)
Figure 3.3
$0
 Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree
First Decision Second Decision Payoffs
Point Point
Favorable Market (0.78)
$190,000
2 Unfavorable Market (0.22)
–$190,000
Favorable Market (0.78)
Small $90,000
3 Unfavorable Market (0.22)
Plant –$30,000
No Plant
–$10,000
1 Favorable Market (0.27)
$190,000
4 Unfavorable Market (0.73)
–$190,000
Favorable Market (0.27)
Small $90,000
Plant
5 Unfavorable Market (0.73)
–$30,000
No Plant
–$10,000

Favorable Market (0.50)

$200,000
6 Unfavorable Market (0.50)
–$180,000
Favorable Market (0.50)
Small $100,000
7 Unfavorable Market (0.50)
Figure 3.4 Plant –$20,000
No Plant
$0
 Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree

1. Given favorable survey results,

EMV(node 2) = EMV(large plant | positive survey)
= (0.78)($190,000) + (0.22)(–$190,000) = $106,400
EMV(node 3) = EMV(small plant | positive survey)
= (0.78)($90,000) + (0.22)(–$30,000) = $63,600
EMV for no plant = –$10,000
2. Given negative survey results,
EMV(node 4) = EMV(large plant | negative survey)
= (0.27)($190,000) + (0.73)(–$190,000) = –$87,400
EMV(node 5) = EMV(small plant | negative survey)
= (0.27)($90,000) + (0.73)(–$30,000) = $2,400
EMV for no plant = –$10,000
 Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree

3. Compute the expected value of the market survey,

EMV(node 1) = EMV(conduct survey)
= (0.45)($106,400) + (0.55)($2,400)
= $47,880 + $1,320 = $49,200
4. If the market survey is not conducted,
EMV(node 6) = EMV(large plant)
= (0.50)($200,000) + (0.50)(–$180,000) = $10,000
EMV(node 7) = EMV(small plant)
= (0.50)($100,000) + (0.50)(–$20,000) = $40,000
EMV for no plant = $0
5. The best choice is to seek marketing information.
 Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree
First Decision Second Decision Payoffs
Point Point
$106,400 Favorable Market (0.78)
$190,000
Unfavorable Market (0.22)
–$190,000

$106,400
$63,600 Favorable Market (0.78)
Small $90,000
Unfavorable Market (0.22)
Plant –$30,000
No Plant
–$10,000
–$87,400 Favorable Market (0.27)
$190,000
Unfavorable Market (0.73)
$2,400 –$190,000
$2,400 Favorable Market (0.27)
Small $90,000
Unfavorable Market (0.73)
Plant –$30,000
No Plant
–$10,000
$49,200

$10,000 Favorable Market (0.50)

$200,000
Unfavorable Market (0.50)
–$180,000
$40,000

$40,000 Favorable Market (0.50)

Small $100,000
Unfavorable Market (0.50)
Plant –$20,000
Figure 3.5
No Plant
$0
Expected Value of Sample Information

 Suppose Thompson wants to know the

actual value of doing the survey.
Expected value Expected value
with sample of best decision
EVSI = information, assuming – without sample
no cost to gather it information

= (EV with sample information + cost)

– (EV without sample information)

EVSI = ($49,200 + $10,000) – $40,000 = $19,200

 Sensitivity Analysis

 How sensitive are the decisions to

changes in the probabilities?
 How sensitive is our decision to the
probability of a favorable survey result?
 That is, if the probability of a favorable
result (p = .45) where to change, would we
make the same decision?
 How much could it change before we would
make a different decision?
 Sensitivity Analysis
p = probability of a favorable survey result
(1 – p) = probability of a negative survey result
EMV(node 1) = ($106,400)p +($2,400)(1 – p)
= $104,000p + $2,400
We are indifferent when the EMV of node 1 is the
same as the EMV of not conducting the survey,
$40,000
$104,000p + $2,400 = $40,000
$104,000p = $37,600
p = $37,600/$104,000 = 0.36
If p<0.36, do not conduct the survey. If p>0.36,
conduct the survey.
 Bayesian Analysis
 There are many ways of getting
probability data. It can be based on:
 Management’s experience and intuition.
 Historical data.
 Computed from other data using Bayes’
theorem.
 Bayes’ theorem incorporates initial
estimates and information about the
accuracy of the sources.
 It also allows the revision of initial
estimates based on new information.
 Calculating Revised Probabilities

 In the Thompson Lumber case we used these four

conditional probabilities:
P (favorable market(FM) | survey results positive) = 0.78
P (unfavorable market(UM) | survey results positive) = 0.22
P (favorable market(FM) | survey results negative) = 0.27
P (unfavorable market(UM) | survey results negative) = 0.73

 But how were these calculated?

 The prior probabilities of these markets are:

P (FM) = 0.50
P (UM) = 0.50
 Calculating Revised Probabilities
 Through discussions with experts Thompson has
learned the information in the table below.
 He can use this information and Bayes’ theorem
to calculate posterior probabilities.
STATE OF NATURE
RESULT OF FAVORABLE MARKET UNFAVORABLE MARKET
SURVEY (FM) (UM)

Positive (predicts P (survey positive | FM) P (survey positive | UM)

favorable market
for product) = 0.70 = 0.20

Negative (predicts
unfavorable P (survey negative | FM) P (survey negative | UM)
market for = 0.30 = 0.80
product)

Table 3.12
 Calculating Revised Probabilities
 Recall Bayes’ theorem:

P ( B | A)  P ( A)
P( A | B) 
P ( B | A)  P ( A)  P ( B | A )  P ( A )

where
A, B  any two events
A  complement of A

For this example, A will represent a favorable

market and B will represent a positive survey.
 Calculating Revised Probabilities
 P (FM | survey positive)
P ( survey positive | FM )  P ( FM )

P(survey positive |FM) P(FM)  P(survey positive |UM)  P(UM)

(0.70)(0.50) 0.35
   0.78
(0.70)(0.50)  (0.20)(0.50) 0.45

 P (UM | survey positive)

P ( survey positive | UM )  P (UM )

P(survey positive |UM) P(UM)  P(survey positive |FM) P(FM)

(0.20)(0.50) 0.10
   0.22
(0.20)(0.50)  (0.70)(0.50) 0.45
 Calculating Revised Probabilities

Probability Revisions Given a Positive Survey

POSTERIOR PROBABILITY
CONDITIONAL
PROBABILITY P(STATE OF
P(SURVEY NATURE |
STATE OF POSITIVE | STATE PRIOR JOINT SURVEY
NATURE OF NATURE) PROBABILITY PROBABILITY POSITIVE)
FM 0.70 X 0.50 = 0.35 0.35/0.45 = 0.78
UM 0.20 X 0.50 = 0.10 0.10/0.45 = 0.22
P(survey results positive) = 0.45 1.00

Table 3.13
 Calculating Revised Probabilities
 P (FM | survey negative)
P ( survey negative | FM )  P ( FM )

P(survey negative |FM) P(FM)  P(survey negative |UM)  P(UM)

(0.30)(0.50) 0.15
   0.27
(0.30)(0.50)  (0.80)(0.50) 0.55

 P (UM | survey negative)

P ( survey negative | UM )  P (UM )

P(survey negative |UM) P(UM)  P(survey negative |FM) P(FM)

(0.80)(0.50) 0.40
   0.73
(0.80)(0.50)  (0.30)(0.50) 0.55
 Calculating Revised Probabilities

Probability Revisions Given a Negative Survey

POSTERIOR PROBABILITY

CONDITIONAL
PROBABILITY P(STATE OF
P(SURVEY NATURE |
STATE OF NEGATIVE | STATE PRIOR JOINT SURVEY
NATURE OF NATURE) PROBABILITY PROBABILITY NEGATIVE)
FM 0.30 X 0.50 = 0.15 0.15/0.55 = 0.27

UM 0.80 X 0.50 = 0.40 0.40/0.55 = 0.73

P(survey results positive) = 0.55 1.00

Table 3.14
 Using Excel
Formulas Used for Bayes’ Calculations in Excel

Program 3.2A
 Using Excel
Results of Bayes’ Calculations in Excel

Program 3.2B
 Potential Problems Using
Survey Results

 We can not always get the necessary

data for analysis.
 Survey results may be based on cases
where an action was taken.
 Conditional probability information
may not be as accurate as we would
like.
 Utility Theory
 Monetary value is not always a true
indicator of the overall value of the
result of a decision.
 The overall value of a decision is called
utility.
 Economists assume that rational
people make decisions to maximize
their utility.
 Utility Theory
Your Decision Tree for the Lottery Ticket
$2,000,000
Accept
Offer
$0
Heads
Reject (0.5)
Offer

Tails
(0.5)

Figure 3.6 EMV = $2,500,000

$5,000,000
 Utility Theory
 Utility assessment assigns the worst outcome a
utility of 0, and the best outcome, a utility of 1.
 A standard gamble is used to determine utility
values.
 When you are indifferent, your utility values are
equal.

Expected utility of alternative 2 = Expected utility of alternative 1

Utility of other outcome = (p)(utility of best outcome, which is 1)
+ (1 – p)(utility of the worst outcome,
which is 0)
Utility of other outcome = (p)(1) + (1 – p)(0) = p
 Standard Gamble for Utility
Assessment
(p)
Best Outcome
Utility = 1
(1 – p) Worst Outcome
Utility = 0

Other Outcome
Utility = ?
Figure 3.7
 Investment Example
 Jane Dickson wants to construct a utility curve
revealing her preference for money between $0
and $10,000.
 A utility curve plots the utility value versus the
monetary value.
 An investment in a bank will result in $5,000.
 An investment in real estate will result in $0 or
$10,000.
 Unless there is an 80% chance of getting $10,000
from the real estate deal, Jane would prefer to
have her money in the bank.
 So if p = 0.80, Jane is indifferent between the bank
or the real estate investment.
 Investment Example
p = 0.80 $10,000
U($10,000) = 1.0

(1 – p) = 0.20 $0
U($0.00) = 0.0

$5,000
U($5,000) = p = 0.80

Utility for $5,000 = U($5,000) = pU($10,000) + (1 – p)U($0)

= (0.8)(1) + (0.2)(0) = 0.8
Figure 3.8
 Investment Example
 We can assess other utility values in the same way.
 For Jane these are:

Utility for $7,000 = 0.90

Utility for $3,000 = 0.50

 Using the three utilities for different dollar amounts,

she can construct a utility curve.
 Utility Curve
1.0 –
U ($10,000) = 1.0

0.9 –
U ($7,000) = 0.90

0.8 –
U ($5,000) = 0.80

0.7 –

0.6 –
Utility

0.5 –
U ($3,000) = 0.50

0.4 –

0.3 –

0.2 –

0.1 –
U ($0) = 0
| | | | | | | | | | |
$0 $1,000 $3,000 $5,000 $7,000 $10,000

Monetary Value
Figure 3.9
 Utility Curve
 Jane’s utility curve is typical of a risk avoider.
 She gets less utility from greater risk.
 She avoids situations where high losses might occur.
 As monetary value increases, her utility curve increases
at a slower rate.

 A risk seeker gets more utility from greater risk

 As monetary value increases, the utility curve increases
at a faster rate.

 Someone with risk indifference will have a linear

utility curve.
 Preferences for Risk

Risk
Avoider
Utility

Risk
Seeker

Figure 3.10
Monetary Outcome
 Utility as a
Decision-Making Criteria

 Once a utility curve has been developed

it can be used in making decisions.
 This replaces monetary outcomes with
utility values.
 The expected utility is computed instead
of the EMV.
 Utility as a
Decision-Making Criteria

 Mark Simkin loves to gamble.

 He plays a game tossing thumbtacks in
the air.
 If the thumbtack lands point up, Mark wins
$10,000.
 If the thumbtack lands point down, Mark
loses $10,000.
 Mark believes that there is a 45% chance
the thumbtack will land point up.
 Should Mark play the game (alternative 1)?
 Utility as a
Decision-Making Criteria

Decision Facing Mark Simkin

Tack Lands
Point Up (0.45)
$10,000

Tack Lands
Point Down (0.55)
–$10,000

Figure 3.11 Mark Does Not Play the Game

$0
 Utility as a
Decision-Making Criteria

 Step 1– Define Mark’s utilities.

U (–$10,000) = 0.05
U ($0) = 0.15
U ($10,000) = 0.30

 Step 2 – Replace monetary values with

utility values.
E(alternative 1: play the game) = (0.45)(0.30) + (0.55)(0.05)
= 0.135 + 0.027 = 0.162
E(alternative 2: don’t play the game) = 0.15
 Utility Curve for Mark Simkin

1.00 –

0.75 –
Utility

0.50 –

0.30 –
0.25 –

0.15 –

0.05 –
Figure 3.12 0 |– | | | |
–$20,000 –$10,000 $0 $10,000 $20,000

Monetary Outcome
 Utility as a
Decision-Making Criteria

Using Expected Utilities in Decision Making

E = 0.162 Tack Lands Utility

Point Up (0.45)
0.30

Tack Lands
Point Down (0.55)
0.05

Figure 3.13 Don’t Play

0.15